of the game.

what we may call (in analogy with chess) the opening For on the combined principle of action, the first lead is by far the most important one in the whole hand, inasmuch as it is the first and most prominent intimation given to your partner as to the cards you hold. He will, if he is a good player, observe with great attention the card you lead, and will at once draw inferences from it that may perhaps influence the whole of his plans. nature of the opening you adopt is consequence to your joint welfare. that, however your play may vary in of the hand, you must, as a general principle, adopt always the same opening, or it will be impossible for your partner to draw any inferences from it at all.

And hence the

of the greatest And it is clear

the after part

Let us, therefore, consider how the choice between the three systems of play is determined.

We may dismiss the first, or master-card system, very briefly. It is evidently not good at once to lead out master cards of a suit of which you hold only a few; for the reason that you can probably make them whenever anyone else leads it, and that they will then serve as 'cards of re-entry,' to procure you additional leads at a future period of the hand, which then become peculiarly valuable, owing to the increased information you have obtained. Hence the master

card system, though often of great use, must not be the one by which the opening of the game is determined.

Between the two other systems, however, the choice is not so clear. It is by no means easy to prove which of them, if pursued systematically, would in the long run be the most advantageous as regards the single hand; to demonstrate this would require the study of almost infinite combinations of chances. But there is a conclusive argument in favour of the fourth or long-suit system; namely, that, treated as a form of opening, it is the only one which adapts itself favourably and conveniently to the combination of the hands.

The difficulties in the combined use of the trumping system would be very great. In the first place, it would not often happen that your hand contained a suit of one card only: you might have none of a suit, when you could not lead it; your minimum might be two, when the policy would be doubtful; or three, when it would be useless. Hence there would be no uniformity in your opening; it would be always equivocal, and would consequently give your partner no information. Then, after leading a single card you could not yourself persevere in your system, or do anything more to further it; as your next lead must be on some other ground-a complexity which would

effectually prevent favourable combined action. And, thirdly, your plan would be so easily overthrown by the adversaries leading trumps, which, if they knew your system, a very moderate strength would justify them in doing, to your utter discomfiture.

The long suit opening is free from all these objections. It is uniformly practicable, as every hand must contain at least one suit of four cards; you can persevere in your design every time you get the lead, whether your partner can help you or not; your indications to your partner are positive and unmistakeable; and the adversaries are almost powerless to offer you any direct obstruction—their only resource being to bring forward counter-plans of their own.

It is sometimes alleged against the long suit opening, that in many cases it cannot be followed to its conclusion, from the strength of trumps being against you, or from untoward fall of the cards. But even in this case it is still the safest, as, though it may not succeed for yourself, it is the way least likely to help your adversary, and indeed it furnishes you always with the best means of obstructing him, by forcing his hand. And it must be recollected that its adoption as an opening does not bind you always implicitly to follow it up, or in the least prevent you from making tricks, in the after-part of the hand, by any of the other modes. if you should find it to your

interest to do so. Any master-cards you possess will take care of themselves; and if you are short of a suit, and wish to trump it, you have only to wait till it is led by some one else, and you attain your object without misleading your partner.

Thus the long suit system has not only peculiar benefits of its own, but it permits full advantage being taken of the other systems also, and, used as an opening, is in all cases the safest play. To this we may add that it has characterised the scientific game ever since it was invented; it has stood the test of long experience; and is universally adopted by the best authorities we have. At the same time, by the more recondite and scientific character of the play it admits of, it is preferred by all eminent players, as calling into operation the highest intellectual and reasoning powers, and thereby greatly ennobling the game.

Accepting, therefore, this system as the preferable one, we are now able to enunciate the fundamental theory of the modern scientific game, which is—

That the hands of the two partners shall not be played singly and independently, but shall be combined, and treated as one. And that in order to carry out most effectually this principle of combination, each partner shall adopt the long suit system as the general basis of his play.

30

CHAPTER IV.

DEVELOPEMENT OF THE THEORY.

WE now proceed to explain how this theory is developed into a practical shape; and this we must divide off under several heads. The most important is

Its Influence on the Management of Trumps.

The treatment of trumps is a great puzzle to illtaught players, who generally use them in the wildest and most unskilful way. To play them in detail to the best advantage always requires much judgment, even in the most educated; but the general principles of their management are easily and clearly determined by our theory, as we shall endeavour to show.

Trumps may be used for three distinct purposes― namely,

1. To play as ordinary or plain suits. This use, however, ignores their higher or special value, and ought therefore to be made quite subordinate to the other two.